Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/04/18/13:03:40
On 18 Apr 2001, at 18:05, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 pavenis AT lanet DOT lv wrote:
>
> > > > Compiler switch reported size of struct vp
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.2 -fpack-struct 80 eighty
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.3 -fpack-struct 79 seventynine
> > > > mingw gcc 2.95.2 -fpack-struct 79 seventynine
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.2 80 eighty
> > > > djgpp gcc 2.95.3 80 eighty
> > > > mingw gcc 2.95.2 88 eightyeight
> > > >
> > > > when manually added, the sum of the sizes of the struct members is _79_
> > >
> > > So it looks like -fpack-struct does work, at least in 2.95.3.
> >
> > With my test case I'm getting following results:
> >
> > DJGPP port of gcc-2.95.3 : doen't work
>
> This is _really_ strange: how come the same binary yields different
> results? Does the bug depend on the struct layout perhaps?
>
> I also don't understand why are there differences between MinGW, DJGPP,
> and GNU/Linux for the same GCC version: these all target the same
> processor, so the alignment of struct fields should be the same, no?
Well it seems to work with C but not with C++ (I tested C++ first). The
same under Linux.
For MINGW and with gcc-3.0 prerelease -fpack-struct works both for
C and C++
Andris
- Raw text -